Dear Pedro,
Thanks for the copy of your ICIS 2016 presentation which covers a lot of 
evolutionary aspects regarding intelligence and the information flow.
Perhaps one aspect of that subject may deserve a bit more. It is “human mind”.
For instance, your chart (N°39) on the four domains of science (physical, 
biological, social, informational) could contain a 5th component: “humanities” 
in order to explicitly take into account human mind. This because it is a key 
step in the evolution of our universe (energy, matter, life, human mind) that 
cannot be today deduced from the other domains. And also because an 
understanding of human mind could introduce possible evolutions of human 
motivations for the better of mindkind (you remember the evolutionary scenario 
where the proposed interactions of anxiety management with self-consciousness 
introduce possibilities for new understandings on human nature in terms of 
motivations and actions. I think (and hope) that human evolution is not over 
and this is in the direction of sheding some light on a possible maturing of 
human self-consciousness for the better of mankind). 


Christophe Menant, Proposal for an evolutionary approach 
Christophe Menant (2010). Evolutionary Advantages of Inter-Subjectivity and 
Self-Consciousness Through Improvements of Action Programs (2010). 
Dissertation, Tucson ...


De : Fis <> de la part de Pedro C. Marijuan 
Envoyé : jeudi 17 novembre 2016 14:09
À : 'fis'
Objet : [Fis] Intelligence & Meaning & The Brain

Dear FIS Colleagues,

Herewith the dropbox link to the Chengdu's presentation on Intelligence
and the Information Flow (as kindly requested by Christophe and Gordana).

About the ongoing exchanges on language and meaning, there could be some
additional arguments to consider:

1. Evolutionary origins of language (Terry can say quite a bit about
that). It is difficult to establish a clear stage into which well formed
oral language would have emerged. That the basis was both gestural
(Susan Goldin Meadow) and emotional utterances seems to be more and more
accepted. Alarm calls for instance in some monkeys contain distinct
sound codes that clearly imply an associated meaning on what is the
specific predator to take care of (aerial, felines, snakes) with
differentiated behavioral escape responses in each case. Pretty more
complex in human protolanguages.
2. Nervous Systems functioning. The action-perception cycle in advanced
mammals would be the engine of information processing and meaning
generation. The advancement of the life cycle would be the source and
sink of the communicative exchanges and the ultimate reference for
meaning. (This connects with the info flows and intelligence of my
3. Human "sociotype" maintenance. As the natural social groups of humans
grew out of proportion regarding other Anthropoidea (see Dunbar's
number), a new form of "grooming" and group consensus was established
around language and other emotional utterances (importance of laughter).
Paradoxically, language's meaning becomes downsized to the level of
small talk, just chattering to keep social bonds afloat.  The "social
brain hypothesis" on the origins of language developed by Robin Dunbar
and other scholars points in this direction.

In my opinion, points 1 and 3 have already appeared in this list. But
point 2 has been very rarely discussed among us (how the brain
fabricates meaning). So, tentatively, the next discussion session will
deal with some of this neurodynamic stuff (in preparation yet: "The
Topological Brain"). In the meantime, Maybe Mark would like to make some
concluding comments in order to close the present session... Thanks are
due to him both for his preparation-work and for his patience regarding
all the tangents in this session!

Best wishes

El 16/11/2016 a las 15:51, Dai Griffiths escribió:
> Many (most?) linguistic interactions are not propositional in the
> sense that you imply.
> There is no verifiable equivalent to opening the fridge door for
> utterances like "Cool", "Give us a hand won't you", "You're welcome",
> "Justin Bieber is wonderful", "You go and sneak in round the back
> while I distract them at the front door", and so on.
> So I doubt your 'usually', and the application to natural language.
> Dai
> On 15/11/16 15:05, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> A model is a mathematical structure making a sentence (proposition)
>> true or false, and this, in my opinion applies to meaning in the
>> natural language, where usually some notion of reality is involved:
>>  the proposition "there is two beers in the fridge" is judged
>> meaningful because we believe in a reality with fridge containing, or
>> not, beers.

Fis mailing list
Fis Info Page -<>
The FIS initiative (Foundations of Information Science) started in 1994 with a 
first meeting in Madrid (organized by Michael Conrad and Pedro Marijuan), and 
was ...

Fis mailing list

Reply via email to